> Agencies like the NLRB, SEC, and others also preside over judicial action.

Legally, they don’t! Nobody seriously argues Congress can create independent agencies that exercise Article III’s “judicial power.” The seeming “judicial actions” presided over by the NLRB, SEC, etc., are justified based on the theory that they are merely using court-like procedures to perform an executive function. It’s just a way of structuring an investigation and enforcement that resembles judicial procedures, but where the end result is something the executive would have the power to do anyway.

> I also personally don't think that the founders were playing a joke on us when they wrote the 9th amendment.

Can you help me understand this argument? Say I have a list of countries in Europe: Germany, France, Italy, Sweden, Norway. Then I say, “the enumeration in this list of certain countries shall not be construed to deny or disparage other countries being in Europe.” That paraphrases the 9th amendment, right? You couldn't rely on that provision to say “Denmarkistan” is a country in Europe, right? You’d need some outside evidence to prove that this country exists.

The problem with “emanations from penumbras” is that it uses the constitution itself to bootstrap a supposed privacy right that isn’t listed and isn’t supported by outside evidence. Maybe a right to privacy exists, maybe it doesn’t. But you can’t prove that by pointing to the 9th amendment.